Help me make WotC adventures better.

Well, my intent wasn't to devalidate Aberzanzorax's opinion or assessment - when, in fact, it's an assessment I even share. :D

I just wrote the post to (re)alert us to the diversity of opinion here. Which is exactly what I go on to say.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Hi Rodney!

First, I have not been a big fan of WotC Dungeon/Dragon. When it came time to renew my subscription I let it lapse largely because of the quality of the adventures.

Second, I have not read this whole thread; only the first page or so. I don’t know if what I am going to say here is repetition or new information.

Third, I am going to use Silver’s Call, Dungeon 174 by Stephen Radney-MacFarland as an example. It is good example, I think, because it does a little right and a lot wrong. It is also short enough that I can go through it piece-by-piece and show you where the good and bad parts are.

The adventure starts on page 62 (which is actually page 9) in the version I had downloaded. The artwork is pretty evocative; a balding man and a spiky-haired woman with electricity dancing between them. The DM’s hook, however, is fairly mundane -- “The wizard Casaubon hires a group of adventures (I believe this should be adventurers) to help him achieve his destiny. The characters must confront mercenaries, warlocks and an ancient evil as they unseal the final barrier imprisoning this powerful treasure.” -- there is nothing in those two sentences that make me say “Cool!”

Page 10 is the best page in the adventure. The first four paragraphs provide a nice synopsis of the adventure (although the actual Adventure Synopsis is on page 11). Again, “adventures” is used in place of “adventurers” and the hypertext [link] and [/link] appear around “Chaos Scar”. While individually these are really rather minor concerns, taken together I am starting to get a feeling that this piece was rushed out the door. (I make no claims about my own ability with grammar being any better – I do expect more from people who do this professionally though.)

The rest of page 10 continues under the title “Background” -- this, to me, is the best part of the adventure. It is interesting, it hints at a larger world, and it gives me information that I can play around with later on in the campaign.

Page 11 starts by finishing up the background information -- again, nothing really bad here. The “Adventure Synopsis” is a pretty straight forward as well, although I am starting to wonder why there was a need to write a synopsis on page 10 and on Page 11? I did enjoy that the author gave some characterization to Casaubom -- I think it is important to give the DM some guidance as to how to play the NPC. I think more could have been done with the rival, Ediza. The hints at overcoming the mercenaries in ways other than combat was a nice touch.

The part about Dungeon Tiles I am going to set aside for the moment. I will discuss them more in the encounter sections of the adventure.

The treasure parcel system is something I am not a big fan of. I prefer that -- if there are magic items to be given out -- they should be relevant in the stat-blocks of the encounters. This is just a personal opinion and I am sure that there are many who will disagree.

“Getting Started” -- pretty basic read-aloud text here. Not much more than “I’m a wizard, I have money.” The Insight and (on page 12) Arcana checks add a nice amount of character to Casaubon. As does the detailed sidebar named Casaubon. I think I would have liked all of the information to play Casaubon to be in one location rather than spread throughout the adventure.

The section entitled “Digging Deeper” is very useful and very flavorful. My players tend to be of the more cautious type and prefer doing a lot of research before they go on adventures. Having some guidance there is a huge help to me.

“Approaching the Cave of Dark Whispers” Reading through this section I got the feeling that this was the third time I have read a synopsis of the adventure; then I realized this was the adventure. Sigh. It is pretty linear; encounter #1, then encounter #2, then encounter #3. I have no options but to encounter them in that order. I have no map to set up the area. No guidance if my characters want to scout around. No alternative ways to proceed with the adventure.

From here we move into the three sections of tactical encounters. The first being “Mercenaries at the Mouth” The actual encounter (assuming combat) is pretty good; there is a nice combination of artillery, brutes, skirmishers, and lurkers. The section on tactics is nice, as is the section on surrender. There is something missing though, earlier the author had mentioned bypassing this encounter “in other ways”. Well, there is no guidance as to what those other ways are. Perhaps a section detailing a skill check to sneak by the guards or, a section detailing a skill check to bribe the guards. Both seem to be completely obvious tactics a party might take.

A word about Dungeon Tiles. They are limited. Looking at the map on page 15 it presumes that the party will enter on the left side. That is where the path comes in and where the most open space for the PCs is. Unfortunately, when I laid that map out on the table my players immediately wanted to sneak around to the top of the map, and assault the mercenaries from that direction. This completely negates the tactics section on the previous page. The mercenaries know the importance of a well fortified position and yet they leave open a gigantic hole in the structure where they can all be assaulted easily by savvy PCs. It seems like a logical tactic for intelligent players to take -- sneak around to the place where you have some cover and the mercenaries don’t. The map should have extended up at least another ten squares to account for that tactic.

The second tactical encounter -- “The sealed Doorway” -- again has a good collection of monsters, and the tactics section works nicely. The PCs need to stop “X” from happening -- it feels very cinematic. The only thing missing is a good description of the chamber, how does it look and feel, give me descriptions!!!

A second word on Dungeon Tiles. Looking at the map on page 18 is tough. It is kind of this funny polygon and there is way too much white space on the page -- it feels incomplete. Even just surrounding the dungeon tiles with cave stone would help alleviate the “unfinished” look. (This is also a problem throughout the adventure. There is a lot of white space. Given my concerns about there not being enough descriptions, guidance, etc. it feels like the author/editor wasted space.)

The final encounter -- “Call Heeded” -- again has a nice collection of monsters. The transformation of Casaubon is a nice little switch at the end. Again, the map leaves something to be desired, as does the descriptions of the room.A little more characterization of Casaubon would be nice.


All in all, I thought the adventure started out pretty good but then fell very flat once the encounters started happening. I like flavor, I like characterization -- I want more of that. The encounters themselves are pretty nicely done mechanically. You got the steak, now give me the sizzle.
 

More than simply fight locations, most encounter/rooms should have something unique in it. It doesn't have to play to the adventure, but merely added for atmosphere and something the players can interact with after the fight, or even incorporate into a page 42 stunt check.

The smaller, the more 'regular' the items, the better. For example the following could be spread throught the dungeon:

1) A shelf on the wall with three dwarven skulls on it.
2) A half drunk bottle of foul-tasting wine on a table.
3) A small (un)holy symbol hanging from a doorknob.
4) A bunch of crumpled up paper in one corner. Looking at them shows they are attempts at a love letter.
5) A child's toy, covered in blood.
6) An angry rat in a cage.

Just things to make the dungeon/unhallowed temple/manor house feel like more than just a set piece for hp bashing. This can go a long way to building an environment the players will think about later. "Hey, remember that fight were we beat that kobold who was unlucky in love?"
 

Hi Rodney and thank you for the opportunity!

My group is running through H1-E3 and we're up to E1 now. As far as what I liked and didn't like:

I loved Keep on the Shadowfell as did my group. We also loved Thunderspire Labyrinth and Demon Queen's Enclave. I would have liked Pyramid of Shadows and King of the Trollhaunt to fit in better with the "go kick Orcus's butt" plot line of the rest of the series. I would have also liked stronger ties between the P1 to P3 series. I have been able to add this central hook myself - the perversion of the Soul Well from H1 to P3 and the final battle against Orcus from E1 through E3 but this could have been better tied together.

I would have much preferred a single book for the whole adventure rather than two books. I always found myself flipping around and shuffling books when I needed something from the original book.

I would like more read-aloud text rather than descriptions that I'm supposed to read and interpret and then describe to my players in the overall story background. The read-aloud text for the encounters is fine.

I would like a summary of important ties between encounters on each encounter page such as:

PCs will reach this through encounter 3 and 5.
PCs will receive the sword of cutting here.
PCs will open the vaults and enter encounter 7 here.

I would like much better integration with Dungeon Tiles as others have mentioned. I didn't buy two sets of every dungeon tile release only to have to whip out the flip-mat. Design Dungeon Tiles around your adventures and vice versa.

I'd also like to see better integration with D&D Miniatures. Don't build encounters with seven minions that use rare D&D miniatures. Try to build encounters with creatures that at least have a D&D Miniature substitute that makes sense.

Another thing to consider is building D&D Adventures more like packs of Dungeon Delves that I can put together into a variety of possible scenarios. I tend to rebuild the published adventures to fit my own general arc. Thunderspire Labyrinth did this pretty well with very separate and distinct areas. Same with Demon Queen's Enclave.

Anyway, that's probably enough comments for now. Thanks again for the opportunity!
 

Well, my intent wasn't to devalidate Aberzanzorax's opinion or assessment - when, in fact, it's an assessment I even share. :D

I just wrote the post to (re)alert us to the diversity of opinion here. Which is exactly what I go on to say.

Thanks for the additional explanation. I only quoted you since it was the first incidence of anything similar, and I just want to make the general point to other people not to do it.

Cheers
 

I have run a few WotC modules, many pre 3.0, some 3.5 and 4.0. Although with 4.0 I only bothered with the first module, KotSF, to get a feel for the system. My first impression on reading the module was that the entire purpose of the module was to introduce DM and players to the 4.0 rules. Like others have mentioned here. Linear, slugfest of combat after combat.

For learning purposes it was ok, but could have been much much shorter. My gaming group honestly got to the point of "Ok we understand the system can we play a less boring module now?"

I think the main point is that it seems you haven't figured out who your audience is. So your modules try to do too much and end up not doing anything really well. I think another poster suggested having different "lines" of modules. Story driven modules, dungeon crawls, weird stuff (where constraints are thrown out the window for the group looking for something really different - Like the good old Barrier Peaks module.), Epic adventure arcs, and so on. I really like this approach because as a consumer I can easily pick out the types of modules my group and I enjoy (story driven).

While I think DDI is an interesting way to provide more fluff to adventures, please for the love of Pete don't require it. Everything should be in the module. What would be really cool to provide via DDI is adaptations of every module to official campaign settings (FR, Ebberon especially). That would be huge value for the buck right there.

So to sum up. Define the audience you are writing for, and market to that audience. Don't try to please everyone in every module.

Cheers!
 

You also need to put more non-combat encounters in your dungeon. Fight after fight after fight, and all fights get boring, no matter how cool the fights are (and you guys are pretty good at cool fights). Instead, mix it up. For every fight, have some other non-combat challenge that takes up a non-trivial amount of time. Non-hostile inhabitants that the party can speak to. Puzzles that test both character skill and player ingenuity. Rooms that the players can search and explore to gain information about the dungeon ant its inhabitants.

This too.

I'm just reading Labyrinth of Madness (from 2e) for converting it to 4e. I don't see anything even _remotely_ like it in 4e. Puzzles have been completely missing from 4e as far as I can tell.

As it is, I'm spending some of my time and money on an old 2e adventure that WotC doesn't even get any money from (used). I'd much rather have spent money on a 4e version of it.
 


"not enough flavour about the adventure; too much flavour about the world defaults".

Here's an Eleven Foot Pole post touching on that issue in Thunderspire Labyrinth.

In fact, I feel that one blog has more to offer your adventure designers than this whole thread. He's got advice on flavor text, NPC design, plot design, and dungeon design, and because he blogged KotS and Thunderspire Labyrinth encounter-by-encounter, everything he says is attached to very specific design choices.

Maybe what you should do is hire him to do a quick onceover on everything?

Or you could copy Magic the Gathering's Great Designer Search. What they did is like a reality show: "This week, everyone has to design a skill challenge. Next week, everyone does an NPC, within these constraints, and the worst designer gets cut." The judging allowed the Magic designers to sell their design philosophy to the audience, and it was a cool read. And, they ended up using all three of the winners as designers!
 

I would like to echo on the "too many combats" statement. Though I know why it is necessary. I am interested in an intrigue adventure where there are more skill challenges than combats. Of course this may not cater to all, but at this point the combat-inclined fans are getting lot of love already. I also think too many combats will rid players of the story momentum. I have played long dungeon crawls and at the end of the game, I would forget what's the quest as the story fades into the background and only reemerges when combats are over. Perhaps is designing adventures, come up with a plot like a movie and then add in combat where ever NEEDED. Though this being D&D, it might be hard to do due to the mentality of the game's playstyle.

It is very important that the very first module of a D&D edition must be GREAT due to it being the doorway to the game and will be the most popular. Keep on Borderlands, Sunless Citadel and now Keep on Shadowfell are an example.
 

Remove ads

Top